In a major relief for Rahul Gandhi, a court in Chandausi, Uttar Pradesh, dismissed a petition filed against him over his alleged remark that the Congress was “fighting the Indian State,” bringing an end to the long legal battle.
In a significant relief for former Congress president and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, a court in Chandausi, Uttar Pradesh, dismissed a petition against him regarding his alleged remarks about the Congress “fighting the Indian State.”
Additional District Judge Aarti Faujdar rejected the petition filed by Simran Gupta, an office bearer of the Hindu Shakti Dal, a few months prior.
The court had previously reserved its judgment on October 28 after hearing arguments from both sides. Gupta had filed a revision petition after an earlier court decision dismissed her application.
Earlier, On 15 January 2025, at the inauguration of the new headquarters of the Indian National Congress in Delhi, Rahul Gandhi said,
“we are not fighting the BJP and the RSS but the Indian State itself,”
Which drew strong backlash from BJP leaders who labeled it as “anti-national.”
A few days later, Simran Gupta (national president of the Hindu Shakti Dal) filed a complaint in the court at Chandausi (in the Sambhal district of Uttar Pradesh) on 23 January 2025.Although the MP–MLA court initially rejected the plea, Gupta subsequently filed a revision petition, leading to a new series of hearings.
Gupta argued that Rahul’s comments could pose a destabilizing threat to the nation. Rahul’s lawyer, Sagheer Saifi, noted that the district court held seven hearings before rejecting the petition.
Meanwhile, Gupta’s lawyer indicated they would consider appealing the decision once they received a copy of the ruling.
Finally, on 7 November 2025, the court (Additional District Judge Aarti Fauzdar at Chandausi) dismissed the petition/complaint.
Advocate Mohammad Sagheer Saifi, representing Gandhi, contended that the case was not legally viable, framing Gandhi’s remarks as part of “political discourse” rather than a direct attack on any community or institution.
Saifi stated in court,
“This was a political statement made in the context of ideological opposition, not an act intended to incite hatred or disrespect toward the State,”
In response, Gupta’s attorney, advocate Sachin Goyal, argued that the statement constituted a direct assault on national institutions and could “spread dissatisfaction among the public.”
Goyal asserted that Gandhi’s comments “cast doubt on the country’s democratic framework and the integrity of its institutions,” which warranted legal examination.
After seven hearings and nearly ten months of consideration, Judge Fauzdar dismissed the petition, ultimately exonerating Gandhi in this matter.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Rahul Gandhi
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
